Background: No recent meta-analysis has holistically analyzed and summarized the efficacy and safety of omarigliptin in type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM). We conducted a meta-analysis to address this knowledge gap. Methods: Electronic databases were searched to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that included patients with T2DM who received omarigliptin in the intervention arm. The control arm consisted of either a placebo (passive control group [PCG]) or an active comparator (active control group [ACG]). The primary outcome assessed was changes in hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c), while secondary outcomes included variations in glucose levels, achievement of glycemic targets, adverse events (AEs), and hypoglycemic events. Results: From 332 initially screened articles, data from 16 RCTs involving 8,804 subjects were analyzed. Omarigliptin demonstrated superiority over placebo in reducing HbA1c levels (mean difference, –0.58%; 95% confidence interval, –0.75 to –0.40; P<0.00001; I2=91%). Additionally, omarigliptin outperformed placebo in lowering fasting plasma glucose, 2-hour postprandial glucose, and in the percentage of participants achieving HbA1c levels below 7.0% and 6.5%. The glycemic efficacy of omarigliptin was similar to that of the ACG across all measures. Although the omarigliptin group experienced a higher incidence of hypoglycemic events compared to the PCG, the overall AEs, serious AEs, hypoglycemia, and severe hypoglycemia were comparable between the omarigliptin and control groups (PCG and ACG). Conclusion Omarigliptin has a favorable glycemic efficacy and safety profile for managing T2DM.

Introduction: The use of e-cigarettes has increased rapidly around the world including in Malaysia. However, a significant proportion of people who started using e-cigarettes later discontinued using them. The aim of this study is to identify prevalence of former e-cigarette use and factors associated with quitting, among Malaysian adults. Methods: This study is a part of a national household survey examining the use of e-cigarettes among Malaysian adults aged 18 years and above in 2016. A multistage stratified cluster sampling method was used in the survey. A bilingual (Malay and English) structured questionnaire was used and data was collected via face-to-face interview. Prevalence of current e-cigarette use and former e-cigarette use were determined. A multiple logistic regression model was used to identify factors associated with quitting e-cigarettes. Results: A total of 4,288 adults participated in the survey, where 110 (3.2%) and 289 (8.6%) were identified as current and former e-cigarette users respectively. The following factors were significantly associated with quitting e-cigarette use: e-cigarette users who had no exposure to e-cigarettes at the workplace (aOR = 2.70; 95% CI: 1.39, 5.24); the perception that e-cigarette is more harmful to others compared to tobacco smoke (aOR = 2.46; 95% CI: 1.22, 4.97); and the perception that e-cigarettes do not help people to maintain cigarette abstinence (aOR = 2.19; 95% CI: 1.23, 3.92). Conclusions This study contributes to a better understanding of the factors associated with cessation of e-cigarettes. Findings from this study can assist any e-cigarette cessation intervention measures.

Introduction: Data on water and sugar sweetened beverages (SSB) intake among young adults in Malaysia is sparse. This study aimed at measuring the intake of plain water and SSB among undergraduate students in a Malaysian university and examine its association with body mass index (BMI). Methods: A total of 376 undergraduate students aged 18-30 years were recruited. A selfadministered questionnaire was used to determine the SSB consumption pattern. The questionnaire consisted of five sections that included the background of the participants, knowledge about SSB, SSB preferences, frequency and portion size. Results: 23.9% of subjects in this study were overweight. Almost all of the subjects took outside food (93.1%) and drink (74.2%). The highest daily consumption was plain water (92.3%), with a majority drinking more than two cups at each intake. Caffeinated drinks (coffee or tea) were the most popular SSB among the students (18.4%). Most students (79.7%) did not consume SSB on a daily basis. A significant association was found between the proportion of plain water consumption and BMI (p<0.05). Those who were overweight consumed a greater amount of plain water as compared to those underweight. Conclusion: Our findings of low plain water intake among the underweight may be used to tailor intervention efforts to increase its intake and reduce that of SSB, especially among underweight young adults.

Background: In Malaysia, occupational allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) is often under-reported. This case report describes a chemical engineer who developed possible ACD, likely due to workplace allergen exposure.Case presentation: He presented with a 4-month history of intensely itchy rashes on both hands, which improved during work breaks. A dermatological examination revealed lichenified, pruritic papules with well-defined borders on the palmar surfaces of both hands. A skin patch test identified reactions to five allergens, including ‘fragrance mix,’ ‘methyldibromo glutaronitrile,’ ‘clioquinol,’ ‘epoxy resin,’ and ‘textile dye mix.’ However, among these, only ‘bisphenol A diglycidyl ether,’ a component of ‘epoxy resin,’ was listed in the safety data sheet as a confirmed occupational exposure. In accordance with local regulations, this case was reported as ‘occupational dermatitis’ to the Department of Occupational Safety and Health. The patient was prescribed symptomatic topical treatments, including emollients and topical corticosteroids. Additionally, he was advised to switch to hypoallergenic products. On follow-up, his chronic inflammatory skin lesions showed improvement. Conclusions Thorough occupational history-taking and patch testing are essential for diagnosing ACD. Personalized health education and regular follow-ups, is crucial in monitoring lesion resolution and evaluating the effectiveness of preventive measures in workplace settings.

Background: Data on the carcinogenic potential of tirzepatide from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are limited. Furthermore, no meta-analysis has included all relevant RCTs to assess the cancer risk associated with tirzepatide. Methods: RCTs involving patients receiving tirzepatide in the intervention arm and either a placebo or any active comparator in the control arm were searched through electronic databases. The primary outcome was the overall risk of any cancer, and secondary outcomes were the risks of specific types of cancer in the tirzepatide versus the control groups. Results: Thirteen RCTs with 13,761 participants were analyzed. Over 26 to 72 weeks, the tirzepatide and pooled control groups had identical risks of any cancer (risk ratio, 0.78; 95% confidence interval, 0.53 to 1.16; P=0.22). The two groups had comparable cancer risks in patients with and without diabetes. In subgroup analyses, the risks were also similar in the tirzepatide versus placebo, insulin, and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist groups. The overall cancer risk was also comparable for different doses of tirzepatide compared to the control groups; only a 10-mg tirzepatide dose had a lower risk of any cancer than placebo. Furthermore, compared to the control groups (pooled or separately), tirzepatide did not increase the risk of any specific cancer types. Despite greater increments in serum calcitonin with 10- and 15-mg tirzepatide doses than with placebo, the included RCTs reported no cases of papillary thyroid carcinoma. Conclusion Tirzepatide use in RCTs over 26 to 72 weeks did not increase overall or specific cancer risk.

Background: Data on the carcinogenic potential of tirzepatide from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are limited. Furthermore, no meta-analysis has included all relevant RCTs to assess the cancer risk associated with tirzepatide. Methods: RCTs involving patients receiving tirzepatide in the intervention arm and either a placebo or any active comparator in the control arm were searched through electronic databases. The primary outcome was the overall risk of any cancer, and secondary outcomes were the risks of specific types of cancer in the tirzepatide versus the control groups. Results: Thirteen RCTs with 13,761 participants were analyzed. Over 26 to 72 weeks, the tirzepatide and pooled control groups had identical risks of any cancer (risk ratio, 0.78; 95% confidence interval, 0.53 to 1.16; P=0.22). The two groups had comparable cancer risks in patients with and without diabetes. In subgroup analyses, the risks were also similar in the tirzepatide versus placebo, insulin, and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist groups. The overall cancer risk was also comparable for different doses of tirzepatide compared to the control groups; only a 10-mg tirzepatide dose had a lower risk of any cancer than placebo. Furthermore, compared to the control groups (pooled or separately), tirzepatide did not increase the risk of any specific cancer types. Despite greater increments in serum calcitonin with 10- and 15-mg tirzepatide doses than with placebo, the included RCTs reported no cases of papillary thyroid carcinoma. Conclusion Tirzepatide use in RCTs over 26 to 72 weeks did not increase overall or specific cancer risk.

Background: In Malaysia, occupational allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) is often under-reported. This case report describes a chemical engineer who developed possible ACD, likely due to workplace allergen exposure.Case presentation: He presented with a 4-month history of intensely itchy rashes on both hands, which improved during work breaks. A dermatological examination revealed lichenified, pruritic papules with well-defined borders on the palmar surfaces of both hands. A skin patch test identified reactions to five allergens, including ‘fragrance mix,’ ‘methyldibromo glutaronitrile,’ ‘clioquinol,’ ‘epoxy resin,’ and ‘textile dye mix.’ However, among these, only ‘bisphenol A diglycidyl ether,’ a component of ‘epoxy resin,’ was listed in the safety data sheet as a confirmed occupational exposure. In accordance with local regulations, this case was reported as ‘occupational dermatitis’ to the Department of Occupational Safety and Health. The patient was prescribed symptomatic topical treatments, including emollients and topical corticosteroids. Additionally, he was advised to switch to hypoallergenic products. On follow-up, his chronic inflammatory skin lesions showed improvement. Conclusions Thorough occupational history-taking and patch testing are essential for diagnosing ACD. Personalized health education and regular follow-ups, is crucial in monitoring lesion resolution and evaluating the effectiveness of preventive measures in workplace settings.

Background: Data on the carcinogenic potential of tirzepatide from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are limited. Furthermore, no meta-analysis has included all relevant RCTs to assess the cancer risk associated with tirzepatide. Methods: RCTs involving patients receiving tirzepatide in the intervention arm and either a placebo or any active comparator in the control arm were searched through electronic databases. The primary outcome was the overall risk of any cancer, and secondary outcomes were the risks of specific types of cancer in the tirzepatide versus the control groups. Results: Thirteen RCTs with 13,761 participants were analyzed. Over 26 to 72 weeks, the tirzepatide and pooled control groups had identical risks of any cancer (risk ratio, 0.78; 95% confidence interval, 0.53 to 1.16; P=0.22). The two groups had comparable cancer risks in patients with and without diabetes. In subgroup analyses, the risks were also similar in the tirzepatide versus placebo, insulin, and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist groups. The overall cancer risk was also comparable for different doses of tirzepatide compared to the control groups; only a 10-mg tirzepatide dose had a lower risk of any cancer than placebo. Furthermore, compared to the control groups (pooled or separately), tirzepatide did not increase the risk of any specific cancer types. Despite greater increments in serum calcitonin with 10- and 15-mg tirzepatide doses than with placebo, the included RCTs reported no cases of papillary thyroid carcinoma. Conclusion Tirzepatide use in RCTs over 26 to 72 weeks did not increase overall or specific cancer risk.

Background: In Malaysia, occupational allergic contact dermatitis (ACD) is often under-reported. This case report describes a chemical engineer who developed possible ACD, likely due to workplace allergen exposure.Case presentation: He presented with a 4-month history of intensely itchy rashes on both hands, which improved during work breaks. A dermatological examination revealed lichenified, pruritic papules with well-defined borders on the palmar surfaces of both hands. A skin patch test identified reactions to five allergens, including ‘fragrance mix,’ ‘methyldibromo glutaronitrile,’ ‘clioquinol,’ ‘epoxy resin,’ and ‘textile dye mix.’ However, among these, only ‘bisphenol A diglycidyl ether,’ a component of ‘epoxy resin,’ was listed in the safety data sheet as a confirmed occupational exposure. In accordance with local regulations, this case was reported as ‘occupational dermatitis’ to the Department of Occupational Safety and Health. The patient was prescribed symptomatic topical treatments, including emollients and topical corticosteroids. Additionally, he was advised to switch to hypoallergenic products. On follow-up, his chronic inflammatory skin lesions showed improvement. Conclusions Thorough occupational history-taking and patch testing are essential for diagnosing ACD. Personalized health education and regular follow-ups, is crucial in monitoring lesion resolution and evaluating the effectiveness of preventive measures in workplace settings.

Background: Data on the carcinogenic potential of tirzepatide from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) are limited. Furthermore, no meta-analysis has included all relevant RCTs to assess the cancer risk associated with tirzepatide. Methods: RCTs involving patients receiving tirzepatide in the intervention arm and either a placebo or any active comparator in the control arm were searched through electronic databases. The primary outcome was the overall risk of any cancer, and secondary outcomes were the risks of specific types of cancer in the tirzepatide versus the control groups. Results: Thirteen RCTs with 13,761 participants were analyzed. Over 26 to 72 weeks, the tirzepatide and pooled control groups had identical risks of any cancer (risk ratio, 0.78; 95% confidence interval, 0.53 to 1.16; P=0.22). The two groups had comparable cancer risks in patients with and without diabetes. In subgroup analyses, the risks were also similar in the tirzepatide versus placebo, insulin, and glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist groups. The overall cancer risk was also comparable for different doses of tirzepatide compared to the control groups; only a 10-mg tirzepatide dose had a lower risk of any cancer than placebo. Furthermore, compared to the control groups (pooled or separately), tirzepatide did not increase the risk of any specific cancer types. Despite greater increments in serum calcitonin with 10- and 15-mg tirzepatide doses than with placebo, the included RCTs reported no cases of papillary thyroid carcinoma. Conclusion Tirzepatide use in RCTs over 26 to 72 weeks did not increase overall or specific cancer risk.